From: matus (matus@snet.net)
Date: Thu Apr 10 2003 - 15:22:05 MDT
Damien Sullivan said:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 03:29:48AM -0400, matus wrote:
>
> > Do you mean to imply that food is more expensive, and getting
> more expensive
> > all the time? I find that hard to believe. Considering we
> make more food
>
> No, I meant to state that the poorest segment has less money with
> which to buy that food.
Then why does the 'poorest segment' recieve 30% more calories today than
they did 30 years ago if they have 'less money with which to buy that food'
?
> > living includes food, clothing, housing, etc, I would wager it
> has decreased
> > primarily because 1) food, clothing, etc have decreased so much and 2)
> > people in densely populated areas just live in smaller places.
> But I would
>
> Living in a smaller place doesn't affect standard of living?
Certainly not like starving to death does. If, in the future, things are so
crowded that we only get 500sf each, I wont find it as deplorable as you
might if those people living in 500sf apartments have heat, hot water,
sanitation, and food, something which some 30 - 80% of the worlds population
doesnt have, depending on which variables you consider. Of course, 200
years ago 100% of the population did not have these things.
So, to answer your question, if someone has food, health, heat, hot water,
clean water, and adequate sanitation, but they live in a 500sf apt instead
of a 3500 sf house, I'll play them the worlds smallest violon in empathy. I
wont consider it a drastic reduction in 'standrad of living' as say, no food
or basic medical care might be a reduction in standard of living.
> Anyway, in my
> experience rent exceeds food expenditures, often by a lot. And
> urban rents
> have been increasing rapidly in many places. Live elsewhere?
> Ah, but where
> are the jobs?
The fact that rent exceeds food expenditures could very well be true, given
the facts I mentioned. That we make more food and its cheaper than ever
before, and land is a definate finite resource. However, the cost of living
is not so clear clut when things like regulation, zoning, politics, et al
are factored into the equation. If we could build any type of building
anywhere (most liberatarians are opposed to zoning) and as close to another
building as we want, as long as that building meets safety requirements
(demanded either by your government or your local private anarchocapitalist
regulatory inspection firm) would we be seeing the drastic rising in living
costs?
Additionally, all indictators suggest that population growth will stop
around 2015 - 2020, I believe it was, at around 12 billion. Thus more
effecient building and construction methods will play a more important role
in reducing the cost of living arrangements.
Michael Dickey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 15:15:52 MDT